bustyresourcesfandomcom-20200216-history
User talk:Sannse
Deleted file? I've posted on the forum and emailed Wikia, yet I've still heard nothing. Why was this file deleted? — hmwith (talk) 18:55, April 24, 2013 (UTC) :Hi Hmwith, I'm sorry about that. I've checked, and we replied to the two emails you sent - the first reply was send on Marth 29th and the other on April 14th. Could you check your spam filters for those days to see if the were misfiltered? I'll copy the first reply below, in case it doesn't turn up. -- sannse (help forum | blog) 21:25, April 25, 2013 (UTC) ::Thank you for the response. I'm not sure what happened to the emails. It was a drawing, not a picture. While I know that pictures are not allowed, I was under the impression that drawings were acceptable. Is that not the case? — hmwith (talk) 00:01, April 29, 2013 (UTC) :::It depends on how detailed or explicit the drawing is. I've seen some drawings that were stronger than any photo I've seen! (although I don't mean yours of course). One way of making the image appear less "nude", is to use an outline drawing with no details - so for your image, with no nipples. I know it's a bit silly from the perspective of many, but it does make a difference in whether an image is passed or not. For example, this image would be considered OK, even though there is only a small difference. It's really a case of us having to have a line somewhere, and you are caught up right on the border of it. -- sannse (help forum | blog) 20:23, April 29, 2013 (UTC) ::::With all-due respect, one cannot determine whether or not breasts are pendulous without nipple position for context. One must see "a nipple at or below the inframammary fold" in the image for it to be educational, per the article, and have "little fullness of the upper breast". Neither of these things can be shown with simply an outline, I'm afraid. Are nipples okay by being denoted just as dots, perhaps, in a very simple drawing? ::::By the way, thank you for your time, Sannse, and I appreciate you discussing this with me. — hmwith (talk) 04:50, May 1, 2013 (UTC) :::::I'm happy to talk it through, I'm just sorry you had trouble getting in touch with us at first! :::::I can definitely see what you mean about the nipples and shading being important in this case. I currently working on those new guidelines I mentioned, and context is going to be a much larger part of them than in the past. So I've talked this over with a colleague, and we've agreed to allow the image. I think in general, it would be good if you could try to keep nudity to a minimum, and "realistic" nudity even more so. That will help in keeping the wiki "general audience" :) But we'll be careful to take the context into account when we review images from here. :::::Because of the way our image review system works, this image will go back into the review queue, so it's possible that I might miss that it's from here and re-delete (although I will do my best not to of course). If that happens, or there are any other problems, please let me know. :::::And again, I'm sorry it's taken so long to sort this out! -- sannse (help forum | blog) 21:43, May 2, 2013 (UTC) ::::::Thanks for everything, and have a fine day. :) — hmwith (talk) 19:20, May 4, 2013 (UTC)